The Black Vault

capricorn wrote:

at1with0 wrote:if ONE life is saved because of increased security with guns (via an agency similar in purpose and scope to the TSA), then it is worth it.

I guess this is where you and I simply have a fundamentally difference of opinion. I think that our freedom is not free (i know that sound grossly cliche and extreme patriotic) but it is true. We have soldiers on the front lines in Afghanistan fighting a war and it seems like thousands of lives are worth it.

The 2nd amendment is there so that we can protect ourselves and once you begin to take that away (like the british tried to do in the 18th century, and the Germans did leading up to the rise of the Nazi party) then you secede control of your freedom.

As far as the TSA is concerned, the effectiveness can be summed up here from an article I pulled from newsweek
http://img252.imageshack.us/img252/2029 ... 528929.jpg

How many airplane attacks similar to the 9/11 attacks have occurred since the institution of the TSA? Your picture from Newsweek doesn't say.

The TSA does not take away our freedom; it merely is an inconvenience. If a bunch of gun owners are inconvenienced by policies that save at least one life, then they'd be worth it.

capricorn wrote:

rath wrote:Yet you still have not shown an overall rise in crime .... & you cant.

Overall crime figures rise 6pc in Qld
By Eric Tlozek, Charmaine Kane and Bruce Atkinson
Updated Wed Oct 24, 2012 9:23pm AEDT
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-10-24/o ... ld/4331272

That's one state off Australia ... so whats it prove ... nothing.

Except maybe more tourist's from poorer nations such as the USA, & England / Europe have been arrested for crimes while they backpacked around Queensland & Australia.

Still does not show a national increase in gun crime.

at1with0 wrote:The TSA does not take away our freedom; it merely is an inconvenience. If a bunch of gun owners are inconvenienced by policies that save at least one life, then they'd be worth it.

How many stories have we read of travelers accidentally boarding and arriving at their destinations while carrying a firearm? You may be willing to surrender all of your freedoms for a little security but I am not. Eve Obama said, this very morning on national television, that you can't legislate for every conceivable action someone may take to inflict harm on others. Which is why I recently brought up movies like Escape From New York, Escape From L.A. and Demolition Man.

Liberal utopian societies where people are fined for being "meanie heads" and banned from consuming food products deemed harmful to them. All made possible by banning guns and everything was sunshine and lollipops. Like OT says, television and movie emoting lines of thinking and education.

rath wrote:

capricorn wrote:

rath wrote:Yet you still have not shown an overall rise in crime .... & you cant.

Overall crime figures rise 6pc in Qld
By Eric Tlozek, Charmaine Kane and Bruce Atkinson
Updated Wed Oct 24, 2012 9:23pm AEDT
http://www.abc.net.au/news/2012-10-24/o ... ld/4331272

That's one state off Australia ... so whats it prove ... nothing.

Except maybe more tourist's from poorer nations such as the USA, & England / Europe have been arrested for crimes while they backpacked around Queensland & Australia.

Still does not show a national increase in gun crime.

Oh yeah, 1/4th of the country is nothing. The statistics of crime on the rise over the past 10 years in Australia is nothing.
I got a great idea, maybe I'll just go argue with a brick wall.

"Which is why I recently brought up movies like Escape From New York, Escape From L.A. and Demolition Man."

"Like OT says, television and movie emoting lines of thinking and education."

rath wrote:That's one state off Australia ... so whats it prove ... nothing.

Opps! we are up to 2 states now

Victoria Police statistics reveal huge spike in assaults and drug crime

BY: MARK DUNN From: Herald Sun November 30, 2012 9:39AM
http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/vi ... 6527284565

capricorn wrote:Oh yeah, 1/4th of the country is nothing. The statistics of crime on the rise over the past 10 years in Australia is nothing.
I got a great idea, maybe I'll just go argue with a brick wall.

Rath could care less if he read the truth about his country, and it is well known gun control had no real impact on crime in his country. This is just another anti-american rant and cheap shot on behalf of Rath, which he began on page one of this thread.

A few good points have been made, and while saying you can not count non-gun violence in the reports, yes you can. Because had the victim had a gun, they would have been able to protect themselves, or at least the perpetrator would have to think twice someone could be armed. That is the issue, what gun control laws will only favor the bad guys in this world, and the answer is all of them.

Disson80r's video had a few real valid points, in that these NEWS stories, only feed into the mind of the deranged. The News coverage spurs on everything from the next mass murder, to shortages of gasoline, the severity of every mole hill blow into a mountain. They nickname killers still on rampages, we fly right over police chases, and we even televised the North Hollywood shoot out live. To the deranged mind, they are elevated to a great position of power and glory, and they just feed on the fact all they have to do is be willing to die, and willing to commit the most heinous of acts, and at the same time believe their is no God, nor Heaven and Hell, so they nothing will happen to them, except death which they want.

We can talk about the kinds of guns are the worst danger, but the truth is statically the common .22 caliber kills more people than any other weapon, but today the assault weapons are the news of the day. Does anyone think that it this same individual did the same exact thing that day, but used a bird hunting shotgun, and a common .22 revolver to kill himself with, the results would be any less? It would probably be even worse, because you couldn't miss with a sawed off barrel and modify it to hold more than 3 rounds.

Well put, Greene, but the implication of the thinking on the anti-gun control side seems to be that these massacres are a necessary evil in order to ensure Big Brother doesn't get your guns.

Are you willing to say those kids had to die so you can be certain some vague conspiracy is thwarted?

DIss0n80r wrote: Are you willing to say those kids had to die so you can be certain some vague conspiracy is thwarted?

There is a reason the founders wrote the 2nd amendment into the constitution. It was so that the people could maintain the balance of power. Why back then was it a necessity but today a conspiracy??

If our guns are taken and the gov't decides to implement a dictatorship where hundreds of thousands of people are killed in the face of tyranny, would have those kids in newtown been worth a sacrifice to keep our gun laws intact?

I'm not sure that all of our citizen militias put together would make any difference if our own military were used against Americans, let alone the additional outside forces and resources (U.N. maybe?) that could be brought against them in the event there is some secret cabal of conspirators such as reptilian bankers plotting to kill us all.

Just for the record, are you agreeing that these massacres are absolutely unavoidable and nothing can be done at all to even lessen their severity or frequency?

And Greene, do you agree with that assessment? Were those children essentially human sacrifices in the name of safeguarding freedom?